GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs Radeon R7 240

Place in performance ranking	806	312
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation	0.16	8.27
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)	Turing (2018−2021)
GPU code name	Oland	N18P-G0 / N18P-G61
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Design	reference	no data
Release date	8 October 2013 (10 years ago)	23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$69	no data
Current price	$109 (1.6x MSRP)	$1185

Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1650 Max-Q has 5069% better value for money than R7 240.

Detailed Specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	320	1024
Core clock speed	no data	1020 MHz
Boost clock speed	780 MHz	1245 MHz
Number of transistors	950 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	35 Watt
Texture fill rate	14.00	72.00
Floating-point performance	499.2 gflops	no data

Form Factor & Compatibility

Information on Radeon R7 240 and GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	no data	medium sized
Bus support	PCIe 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	168 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	N/A	None

VRAM Capacity and Type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	GDDR5	GDDR5, GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1150 MHz	8000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	72 GB/s	112.1 GB/s
Shared memory	no data	-

Connectivity and Outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA	No outputs
HDMI	+	no data
DisplayPort support	-	no data

Supported GPU Technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration	-	no data
CrossFire	1	no data
Enduro	-	no data
FreeSync	1	no data
HD3D	-	no data
PowerTune	-	no data
TrueAudio	-	no data
ZeroCore	-	no data
DDMA audio	+	no data

API Compatibility

List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	DirectX® 12	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	no data	1.2.140
Mantle	-	no data
CUDA	no data	7.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

R7 240 2.34

GTX 1650 Max-Q 15.92
+580%

GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q outperforms Radeon R7 240 by 580% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

R7 240 906

GTX 1650 Max-Q 6163
+580%

GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q outperforms Radeon R7 240 by 580% in Passmark.

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

R7 240 1220

GTX 1650 Max-Q 7779
+538%

GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q outperforms Radeon R7 240 by 538% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD	8−9 −650%	60 +650%
1440p	4−5 −675%	31 +675%
4K	2−3 −800%	18 +800%

Pros & Cons Summary

Performance score	2.34	15.92
Recency	8 October 2013	23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	35 Watt